Last year I caught a leather carp on the Ribble, just short of 10lbs. At first I thought it was a massive chub (it was dark)- the feel clearly wasn't barbel and I saw it turn on the top. Obviously it became clear in the end. What an ugly, grey fish! It also had tatty fins, with one pretty none existent anal fin.
From some of the reports I have heard, river carp are thriving in the Ribble and in rivers all over the country. Is there any evidence to show that this is at the expense of our indigenous species such as roach, chub and barbel?
__________________
If your balls are relatively large then just put one in and leave the other out
I think it's safe to assume that any carp in a river will displace resident species - they are bound to edge out smaller fish such as roach, chub barbel in competition for food
__________________
British by birth, English by the grace of God
: PaSC;,
Last edited by Lord Paul of Sheffield; 07-02-2012 at 14:50.
Originally Posted by Mr Cholmondeley-Corker (PaSC)
From some of the reports I have heard, river carp are thriving in the Ribble and in rivers all over the country. Is there any evidence to show that this is at the expense of our indigenous species such as roach, chub and barbel?
Well, barbel arent strictly indigenous to the Ribble, they were introduced about 30-40 years ago? I am sure someone will have the details.
I would hazard a guess that carp in the Ribble have either been washed in during floods, or illegally transferred in there. I wouldnt imagine that they would successfully spawn in a slightly spatey river like the Ribble, so the numbers will be limited. They do better in slower, deeper rivers.
Carp live in harmony with other river fish, they are a river fish all over the world and have been in rivers over here as long as they have been in stillwaters.
Most of the rivers i've fished have had carp in them and when they were in their prime theyve been full of the usual species cohabiting with the carp. The carp tend to work up and down a stretch of river, even small streams and dont stay localised like most other species do during the day. Ive watched them many times move through the swim and, like seagulls behind a trawler, the small stuff will quite happily use the carp rooting about to get a free meal although barbel are way more aggressive feeders.
You could stock your local bit of river with thousands of carp and the Chub Roach and Barbel would still outnumber them
__________________
To view my art just click on my username
Carp live in harmony with other river fish, they are a river fish all over the world and have been in rivers over here as long as they have been in stillwaters.
Most of the rivers i've fished have had carp in them and when they were in their prime theyve been full of the usual species cohabiting with the carp. The carp tend to work up and down a stretch of river, even small streams and dont stay localised like most other species do during the day. Ive watched them many times move through the swim and, like seagulls behind a trawler, the small stuff will quite happily use the carp rooting about to get a free meal although barbel are way more aggressive feeders.
You could stock your local bit of river with thousands of carp and the Chub Roach and Barbel would still outnumber them
Yes the other species probably would still outnumber the carp, as over time the carp would fan out looking for food but they definitely would serve to reduce the biomass of indigenous species, as they would be competing for the same food, same as when barbel were introduced!
Regards damaged fish (missing scales, ripped fins etc) a lot would've been incurred before they got into the river, though they'll inevitably get some damage in times of flood.
---------- Post added at 17:45 ---------- Previous post was at 17:26 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Cholmondeley-Corker (PaSC)
From some of the reports I have heard, river carp are thriving in the Ribble and in rivers all over the country. Is there any evidence to show that this is at the expense of our indigenous species such as roach, chub and barbel?
Its a widely excepted theory that if introduce a new species into an eco-system and it shares feeding preferences with species already there, then the biomass of the species pre-dating the introduction will drop.
Carp do not belong in British rivers. They are not indigenous to Britain. They exist at the expense of all other species.
Only one thing happens when my brothers and I catch a river carp. It gets cooked and eaten. Delicious.
And before you ask, we're English.
Carp do not belong in British rivers. They are not indigenous to Britain. They exist at the expense of all other species.
Only one thing happens when my brothers and I catch a river carp. It gets cooked and eaten. Delicious.
And before you ask, we're English.
For sure they are technically not indigenous, but they have been here for long enough now for us to accept it. So what species have suffered significantly as a result of river carp, and what evidence do you cite to support your view?
A river can only support a given mass of fish. If you take out the carp there will be more food available to support other (indigenous) species.
When barbel got into the Teme there was a significant reduction in roach catches. In fact, I haven't caught a roach from the Teme in some years.
Why the hell does anyone want carp in rivers when we have moon craters full of the damn things all over the UK?
Originally Posted by Mr Cholmondeley-Corker (PaSC)
Does anyone know if river carp spawn at the same time as indigenous species such as chub and barbel?
Carp spawn when the water temp is a constant (for 7-10 days) 18-22`c. Whereas barbel, chub and bream spawn at 16-20`c, normally that means the latter spawn a week or two earlier than carp.
River Carp
*runs for cover*
Linear Mode
